BBC Formula 1's greatest drivers

Ah, Peter, you missed the chance to repeat the "Don't call me Shirley" joke.

Sorry to have missed out on that one, Barry! There's nothing quite like a discussion of drivers' aromas to sap one's wit - or even one's will to live.

A couple more have made the list over the past weeks

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/17633414


PAR

A couple more have made the list over the past weeks
http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/17633414
PAR

I see that English is not revered at the BBC like it once was:

"Jack Brabham won the Formula One champion in 1959, 1960 and 1966"

oddsfish!!!!!!!!!!

Edited by Allan Lupton, 10 April 2012 - 18:35.

I see that English is not revered at the BBC like it once was:

"Jack Brabham won the Formula One champion in 1959, 1960 and 1966"

oddsfish!!!!!!!!!!

Obviously the strain of writing an entire article without mentioning his beloved Lewis at least once proved too much for him.

At least the article itself seems to fall below the author's usual level of inaccuracy & bias...

Hmm. Don't remember Moss contesting the 1959 title in a Lotus..

Having used Cooper and B.R.M I guess the writer assumed he tried the full set.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/17871420

A couple more have been added.....

PAR

And another couple...
Unbelievable...

WARNING - Please do not eat prior to reading Andrew Benson's predictably fawning "profile" of his beloved Lewis - you will probably end up revisiting your last meal. Describing the (allegedly) 16th best F1 driver EVER as:
"thrillingly brilliant",
"Coupled with that breathtaking pace is an ability to overtake that is just as rare, just as dazzling. "
&
"Hamilton's natural ability is so huge that, if he can find a way to channel it to best effect, there are virtually no limits to what he can achieve."

Goodness knows what he'll come out with for drivers who are BETTER than Hamilton.

I know lists like these are utter rubbish (particularly one which ranks an immature disaster-wating-to-happen like Hamilton above Rindt, Brabham, G Hill & Piquet), but the BBC's reach and reputation are such that many people will actually believe this garbage. Benson also amended his original scribblings, where he referred to Massa as an "inferior" driver - this is the kind of tripe we expect to see from the fanboys in RC, not the "chief F1 writer" for the BBC.


Lower than Hamilton????

In keeping with recent BBC trends, Muddy's "view"of Nelson predictably contains some glaring errors:

"In his first full season, he lost the World Championship at the last race"

1) Nelson's first full season was 1979, not 1980
2) Alan Jones won the championship at the penultimate race of the season in Canada

And of course, no shots of Piquet's superb move on Senna at the 1986 Hungarian GP, or of his great drive in Australia in 1990 to fend off Mansell - instead, they predictably rolled out the tired old footage of the handbags at Hockenheim with Salazar. Nothing like reinforcing a stereotype, is there?

And to think I'm forced to pay their wages to indulge their prejudices...

I see we have a new blood pressure thread

Mika at 14

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/18281041

First non - Word Champion appears in the list......

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/18690210

PAR

I find it ironic that they include the 1981 Spanish GP when back in the day the BBC cut away from the race to show us the rain falling on the covers on Headingley cricket pitch because the schedule said "Cricket".

Edited by D-Type, 30 October 2012 - 14:13.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/19051559

Only eight to go now. The list to date is:

Number 9 – Niki Lauda
Number 10 - Fernando Alonso
Number 11 - Alberto Ascari
Number 12 - Gilles Villeneuve
Number 13 - Nigel Mansell
Number 14 - Mika Hakkinen
Number 15 - Lewis Hamilton
Number 16 - Nelson Piquet
Number 17 - Emerson Fittipaldi
Number 18 - Jack Brabham
Number 19 – Graham Hill
Number 20 – Jochen Rindt

Seven of the remaining eight are pretty obvious: Fangio, Moss, Clark, Stewart, Prost, Senna and Schumacher. But who is the eighth? Surely not Vettel, but then who else? Andretti?

Poll conducted amongst the BBC team? I can't see the likes of Jake Humphrey choosing Andretti, Peterson or Brooks (for example) over the likes of Vettel. Sad to say, I think Seb will be in there, probably at 7 or 8 though.

Poll conducted amongst the BBC team? I can't see the likes of Jake Humphrey choosing Andretti, Peterson or Brooks (for example) over the likes of Vettel. Sad to say, I think Seb will be in there, probably at 7 or 8 though.

Seb in front of Ferdy? Dream on, never in a million years !

The optimist in me hopes that my own favourite Denny will be in there somewhere, but of course he won't. No appreciation of real class these youngsters.

Likewise Dan Gurney.

Any list that has Hamilton above Fittipaldi, Piquet, Jack Brabham, G. Hill and Rindt isn't worth a flying **** anyhow......

Any list that has Hamilton above Fittipaldi, Piquet, Jack Brabham, G. Hill and Rindt isn't worth a flying **** anyhow......

Couldn't agree more, the boy shows frequent flashes of brilliance, but he shows signs of distressing immaturity rather too often, just look at his behaviour last weekend in Belgium. In most companies, if an employee behaved in the way he did, they'd be sacked on the spot. I'm not anti-Hamilton, at times his driving is a joy to behold, but as someone on Racing Comments put it a few days ago, "A $20 million right foot, with a $5 brain". For the reasons jj2728 mentioned, this poll has devalued itself already, but what do old folks like us know about racing?

I would happily put Hamilton above at least one of the names on the quoted list in last post actually. Leave aside the off track stuff - shock horror, racing driver behaves like an idiot - and he is a formidably quick driver and thoroughly deserving world champion. Some mistakes on track - sure - but for some drivers of the past shunts and collisions seem to be part of the mystique.If Hamilton had died in a burning BRM in 1962 having achieved what he has already there would be plenty of misty eyed threads on here I bet...

Edited by john aston, 05 September 2012 - 05:55.

I would happily put Hamilton above at least one of the names on the quoted list in last post actually. Leave aside the off track stuff - shock horror, racing driver behaves like an idiot - and he is a formidably quick driver and thoroughly deserving world champion. Some mistakes on track - sure - but for some drivers of the past shunts and collisions seem to be part of the mystique.If Hamilton had died in a burning BRM in 1962 having achieved what he has already there would be plenty of misty eyed threads on here I bet...

I have to agree with that. There are some really very good drivers in the present crop, we're going through a sort of mini purple-patch. It's very easy for we nostalgists (or is that nostalgits?) to criticise everything about the GP world of today, but the cars are very exciting, and some of the drivers every bit as good in their own way, as those of the past.

I really rate Alonso, and think he could eventually go down in history as one of the greats. Vettel and Hamilton are blindingly fast but prone to occasional lapses of concentration. I would rate Hamilton a better natural driver than G.Hill, and possibly Black Jack - when all is said and done he did have the right car at the right time.

I think that is THE point. Years ago, if you were good, you didn't need to have the right car at the right time. Nowadays, you most definitely do. Although I concede that Alonso seems to be able to do things with what we perceive to be a less-than-perfect car that most could never achieve.

I believe this tends to cause we oldies to maybe under-estimate the ability of some of the modern drivers.

Edited by Barry Boor, 05 September 2012 - 10:13.

I have to agree Barry and have we ever had a better group of " top - line " drivers?

The finger wagging German makes it in at number eight

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/19487080

PAR

So, Alonso's No. 10 and Vettel No. 8? As I'm sure Fernando would say - Que?

As we have just said, it depends how good your car is; this present scenario with the tyres (farcical, really) means sometimes your car works, sometimes it doesn't. Herr Vettel is less able to cope. IMHO. than Senor Alonso. As the Beeb have admitted on their website, Vettel has been lucky to have the best car, more often than not.

I can't see how he can be rated so high until such time as he has won on numerous occasions, when his car has not been the best in the field. It's interesting that the Beeb have placed Alberto Ascari as low as they have - is this to do with the fact that for 2 seasons he had easily the best car, and was team leader and thus "deferred to". Don't get me wrong, any driver who was considered by Fangio to be his main rival, must by definition be a class act, but he was outdriven in 1951 by Gonzalez, and didn't particularly shine in 1954 during his occasional drives for Maserati.

So, double standards from the BBC?

... but he was outdriven in 1951 by Gonzalez, and didn't particularly shine in 1954 during his occasional drives for Maserati.

I don't agree with any of that.

Gonzalez was inspired at Silverstone but Ascari won at the Nurburgring and Monza. His practice time in the Spanish Grand Prix was well over a second better than anybody else. In 1954 he only drove a Maserati twice but was on the front row at Rheims. He was on the back row at Silverstone because Maserati arrived late but set fastest lap, along with most of the rest of the field, admittedly. When he drove a Ferrari at Monza he was on the front row and battling for the lead and he didn't go badly in the Lancia in Spain. He also won an Italian sports car race that he was reputed not to like.

Edited by Roger Clark, 05 September 2012 - 11:38.

Yes, I hang my head in shame. Didn't bother to look up the facts, and stand accused.

I was trying to find an analogy for the Vettel scenario - someone ranked highly, but who had access to the best machinery. Come to that, Fangio always waited till the last minute to see what was the best option, before he agreed to anything. Can hardly blame someone for that.

Still can't see how they can justify Seb at No8 though.

The problem with motor racing polls like this one is that many voters confuse 'great' with 'fast'. To pick just one example, Graham Hill wasn't particularly fast compared to some of his peers, but undeniable great, his results say it all. Likewise with Hamilton, Vettel, Mansell, Rindt and some of the others mentioned, undeniably fast but not really 'great', at least not as I understand the term. Of the current lot, I'd say that only Alonso and possibly Schumacher really qualify without question as great. Maybe some of the others will be joining them in that classification later in their careers.

The problem with motor racing polls like this one is that many voters confuse 'great' with 'fast'. To pick just one example, Graham Hill wasn't particularly fast compared to some of his peers, but undeniable great, his results say it all. Likewise with Hamilton, Vettel, Mansell, Rindt and some of the others mentioned, undeniably fast but not really 'great', at least not as I understand the term. Of the current lot, I'd say that only Alonso and possibly Schumacher really qualify without question as great. Maybe some of the others will be joining them in that classification later in their careers.

Exactly - you can only judge someone after the passage of time. Then history can give the judge a reference point. The BBC have really opened themselves up for criticism on this one, but I suppose they want to pander to their "present" audience. Most of these will only have the vaguest idea who some of the greats were - (like me, with my Ascari boob in a previous post!).

Interesting that the two present drivers you mention are both wonderful tacticians and strategists - they win when by rights they shouldn't.

I don't think they should ever include current drivers in rankings like this - you need to review a driver's whole career.

To take an Olympics analogy, what if someone had included Ben Johnson in a ranking of the greatest sprinters immediately after the 1988 Olympics?

Closer to home, how would Fangio have been rated at the end of 1953? "Past his best years, but still capable of the odd surprise performance". Or how would Graham Hill's rating changed from 1961 to 1966 to 1968 to 1975? Or Senna before Suzuka 1989, after Suzuka 1990, and after his death?

Interesting that in the equivalent thread in Racing Comments, where one might have expected them to prefer current drivers over the heroes of yesteryear, the consensus there also is that Vettel is too high in the list.

Interesting that the two present drivers you mention are both wonderful tacticians and strategists - they win when by rights they shouldn't.

Yes, that's exactly what I meant, and it's a large part of my personal definition of greatness, there's just so much more to it than the term much loved on Racing Comments, "raw speed". In my opinion some of Vettel's recent non-winning drives have been more impressive than his championship winning cruiseathons, in what was unquestionably a better car than any of his opposition had.

JYS in at 7:

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/19631769

Moss in at No. 6...

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/19765439

Well, well. So Stirling won two Grands Prix for BRM in 1959, and was driving 'outside F1' when he had his Goodwood crash in 1962. Time to rewrite the record books, folks.

To find a top twenty, we've now had 62 World Championships, so simply taking every third champion and ignoring repeats you get:

Ascari
Fangio
BrabhamGraham Hill
Clark
Stewart
Emerson Fittipaldi
Lauda
Jones
Piquet
Prost
Mansell
Michael Schumacher
Hakkinen
Raikkonen
Vettel

Ascari won in 52 and 53, Fangio in 55 and 56, but Brabham didn't win in 58, so your every third year must be 1950, 1953, 1956, 1959 and so on. Hence the first name on your list should be Farina

Well, well. So Stirling won two Grands Prix for BRM in 1959, and was driving 'outside F1' when he had his Goodwood crash in 1962. Time to rewrite the record books, folks.

Must be to do with teenage scribblers thinking that a driver only ever drove one make of car in a season and assuming that "F1" means World Championship rather than Formula 1.
No interest in history one concludes.

Must be to do with teenage scribblers thinking that a driver only ever drove one make of car in a season and assuming that "F1" means World Championship rather than Formula 1.
No interest in history one concludes.

Lazy production values. Getting the work experience kid to provide the "facts" because you couldn't be bothered.

To be completely frank (and earnest) I really don't know why we even bother mentioning this spurious load of rubbish on TNF at all.

To be completely frank (and earnest) I really don't know why we even bother mentioning this spurious load of rubbish on TNF at all.

Yes indeed - a case of the BBC resorting to Channel 4 levels of programme making. Why don't they stick to things that they do well? - or used to, anyway...

Yes indeed - a case of the BBC resorting to Channel 4 levels of programme making. Why don't they stick to things that they do well? - or used to, anyway...

With the eminent departure of Charlotte Green and Harriet Cass from the helm I suspect the good ship BBC is about to terminally flounder in the sea of reality.

With the eminent departure of Charlotte Green and Harriet Cass from the helm I suspect the good ship BBC is about to terminally flounder in the sea of reality.

You're right. - But for all that, I'd love to hear/see Ray Winstone & Barbara Windsor as newsreaders....

With the eminent departure of Charlotte Green and Harriet Cass from the helm I suspect the good ship BBC is about to terminally flounder in the sea of reality.

Let me guess arti, what would you say was your favourite character from Sheridan's well-known play The Rivals ?

What's worst is that it probably wasn't a work experience kid at all - it was almost certainly the BBC's "Chief Formula 1 Editor" himself who doesn't know the history of the sport and obviously doesn't care either.

Shows the depths to which the BBC have plumbed that such ignorance is not only tolerated but actually rewarded. If the fool spent less tme shoehorning praise for Lewis Hamilton into every single item he crayons and a bit more time researching then he would almost be worth reading if he could grasp basic grammar and expand his vocabulary beyond his tabloid headline dictionary.

Quite how anyone could rate those 2 well-known demolition derby drivers above Moss is beyond me. Even Prost has a history of "accidents" when it suited him to have them - Suzuka 89 & Zandvoort 83.

I'm hoping that the top 2 spots (for what little it'll be worth is such an idiotic list) will therefore be taken by Fangio & Clark, but unfortuntately I'm sure the brain donors who made the list up will manage to insert Senna in there somehow.

Let me guess arti, what would you say was your favourite character from Sheridan's well-known play The Rivals ?

I enjoy hosting a good party, hope that helps

Is not the real problem that 'Formula 1' is a relatively new, post-Moss invention: indeed, whether we like him or not, a Bernie invention?

Before Bernie there was just motor racing, with all sorts of Formulas, including, of course, a Formula 1 - but it was just one of many, no-less crowd-pulling, events and races. And there were all sort of races, all sorts of Grands Prix some of which, in an apparently arbitrary not so say random system, counted for the world championship and some of which did not.. Indeed that was the malaise that Bernie spotted, and sorted: it was all so diverse, disjointed, so devoid of structure that not even the enthusiasts really knew what the hierarchy was, never mind the external sponsors being drawn into a sport that could no longer afford itself. It was also why Moss could get away with saying 'the world championship doesn't really matter to me' and be believed. Because there was so much else going on that was just as important.

Speaking personally, of course, the only matter worth debating is the Moss-Fangio one, and the only reason for not putting Moss at the top of that list is that Moss puts Fangio there.

Edited by Mal9444, 04 October 2012 - 18:25.

Speaking personally, of course, the only matter worth debating is the Moss-Fangio one, and the only reason for not putting Moss at the top of that list is that Moss puts Fangio there.

Well expressed, and I'd hope there are a few still under pensionable age on here, who understand history well enough to agree with you.

Well expressed, and I'd hope there are a few still under pensionable age on here, who understand history well enough to agree with you.

Well expressed, and I'd hope there are a few still under pensionable age on here, who understand history well enough to agree with you.

Well this 39 year old thought it was the best post he's read all year.

Is not the real problem that 'Formula 1' is a relatively new, post-Moss invention: indeed, whether we like him or not, a Bernie invention?

Before Bernie there was just motor racing, with all sorts of Formulas, including, of course, a Formula 1 - but it was just one of many, no-less crowd-pulling, events and races. And there were all sort of races, all sorts of Grands Prix some of which, in an apparently arbitrary not so say random system, counted for the world championship and some of which did not.. Indeed that was the malaise that Bernie spotted, and sorted: it was all so diverse, disjointed, so devoid of structure that not even the enthusiasts really knew what the hierarchy was, never mind the external sponsors being drawn into a sport that could no longer afford itself. It was also why Moss could get away with saying 'the world championship doesn't really matter to me' and be believed. Because there was so much else going on that was just as important.

Speaking personally, of course, the only matter worth debating is the Moss-Fangio one, and the only reason for not putting Moss at the top of that list is that Moss puts Fangio there.

Great post, Malcolm.

How did Fangio rate Moss? Did his opinion through his post retirement years change as other legends came and went on the scene? Or was he ever even asked who he rated? He lived a good 30+ years past his retirement from GP's so he must have been asked at some point...

Great post, Malcolm.

How did Fangio rate Moss? Did his opinion through his post retirement years change as other legends came and went on the scene? Or was he ever even asked who he rated? He lived a good 30+ years past his retirement from GP's so he must have been asked at some point...

One man whose opinion must count for something was Enzo Ferrari. He was asked constantly for his opinion on "The Greatest Ever", and his answer was surprisingly consistent, invariably "Nuvolari, and the only one who can be compared to him is Moss", though in later years he often had those two names the other way around. So there you have it, if Enzo had been voting in that silly BBC poll, Sir Stirling would have got his vote, and although it carries a little less weight than il Commendatore's, SCM gets my vote as well.

Prost is #5:

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/19874880

and when one reads this sort of thing in his profile:

If Senna was the greatest racing driver of all time, as many believe ...

I think it's becoming fairly obvious who's going to be #1.